Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire), Jan 2023 #18

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
geelongcate said:
It's unlikely her private medical information would've appeared in the press, both because of press restrictions on reporting and because who on earth could've known about it, outside of close family. More likely the welfare visit was known about by journalists and could possibly have been reported. Whether releasing NB's private information was an appropriate response by the police will, I guess, be considered by the investigation.

I have to say, it's hard to imagine that any press story would've had as big an impact as the official police statement did...
Click to expand...
Also, suppose the media asked the family about the welfare incident, it might be well different from “selling scandalous stories about Nicola” as would some other questions like the hackers on PA Pinterest and TikTok accounts.
 
MrsWatson said:
Similar to my own thoughts. Maybe a non-disclosure clause in the contract with the NCA?

He had a lot to say about an ongoing, active investigation, including criticizing the police.
Click to expand...
My thoughts also. Plus LE didn't seem overjoyed at having him on board. Maybe just cautious or maybe due to feedback from other cases.
 
JennieM said:
Prior to the police revealing sensitive information about alcohol, menopause and the 10 Jan visit, once 3rd party involvement was ruled out then most people would consider this to be an unfortunate accident.

If that remained the case, depending on what the family CHOSE to discuss with her daughters - and most importantly at what AGE they decided it was ok to discuss certain things with them (IF there were further things to discuss) - her girls would also believe this to be an unfortunate accident.

The narrative has changed now because of the disclosure of PRIVATE information that the police had not deemed important to the investigation to release from the start.

Regarding to comparing this to Laurel Aldridge's case where chemotherapy info was released by one of her relatives, I believe there are important differences. Her children are adults. Her children already know about the chemo. She needs the chemo to stay alive so releasing the information is important. Her family, not the police, has released the information.

All I know is that if this was about me or my mother or my daughters or my sisters, I would not want this information released. Not because I think it's shameful but because it is private. And when young children are involved, who will become entangled in this narrative as they grow older, it is even more important to protect sensitive information from prying - and not always kind - public eyes. MOO.
Click to expand...
Yes…I just remembered missing person cases where police said they needed insulin there fore it imperative they are found quickly.
Undecided said:
When this was released we also didn’t know where she was and if she could be reading it, which I think should be thought of. I thought someone at WS had said the papers would have been in dodgy ground printing anything medical story wise.

We still don’t know how long she had been there until the inquest, it’s awful to think she may have seen some of it. I still do not understand why ‘vulnerable’ wasn’t mentioned at the beginning if it could’ve helped find her if she’d walked off , there’s always a golden 24 hours, it increased speculation of foul play as it was accident or that.


or why they got the coat length wrong (this was the main hypothesis here at one point that she’d tripped over it) , and road names wrong, or why we still don’t know where the phone was and by whom or when, then there’s the unusual fact the witnesses were related, or why there was no cordoned off bench while they weighed up what had happened or why there was zero evidence that she slipped marks wise or why there was no mention of fields (according to a WS ) she could’ve gone across just a fascination with CCTV from one road, or why a specialist dive team weren’t given crucial information, or why the dog was between bench/gate not bench/river, or why no CCTV was released by the police instead by friends of her in the morning fuelling speculation she wasn’t even there, or why a thousand other things I could mention. Hope the whys will become clear as the police rightly know more than me.

Hope all is clear in inquest but as someone else said it weighs heavily especially if it remains unclear in the inquest how a woman , who didn’t go to the river edge typically according to Strava, never came back from a walk they’d done a hundred times.

Whichever scenario it’s a horrible set of events for Nicola and those she had in her life. I hope in the inquest through evidence etc we finally get to hear from Nicola herself and she gets her voice, through the work they will do now.
Click to expand...
The salacious stories the press might have had someone selling might not be about Nicola. They could have been making inquiries and never published but wanted to know about others in her circle. If that were the case the coroner may never make it public unless it has appeared by then Because it would do more harm than good. But the press may have to introduce it into a report to the inquest to explain what they asked “the family”
 
ginnyw said:
Those are good points. I always somehow imagined it would be her partner, but you are quite right in that it could have been somebody who was there on a visit, or even on the phone. Whatever it was it was, there's no doubting how close it was date-wise to the day when NB sadly disappeared.
Click to expand...
Could be a neighbour. School. Anyone.
 
dunkley said:
An example .....

Mr X reported missing.
Full details taken from person reporting by the attending police officer. Including description, clothing, and details of any vulnerabilities.
Dependent on the whole 'picture', the Misper will be graded. High Risk, or lower.
Immediate local enquiries will be started. Friends, places frequented, sometime (depending on information) specific locations.

A body is found, in a river/lake/reservoir.
This could be hours, days, or weeks later.
Officers dispatched.
Body recovered. Death confirmed.
It is pretty much certain that this is Misper, but formal ID required.
NoK advised.
Unless there is obvious and immediate suspicion of foul play (taking into account the initial report information), the body will be removed to the local hospital mortuary. By the next on list funeral directors - quite often the CoOp.
Body is accompanied/met at the mortuary by police officer.
All clothing and possessions are taken, and labelled.
The body is labelled by the police officer and mortuary technician, and placed in safe storage.
Police officer starts the paperwork, and arranges liaison with NoK re formal ID and how this can be done.
Coroner's officer is notified.
PM completed the next day, or day after, by the hospital pathologist.
This is a routine PM.
There is no requirement for police, or CSI, attendance.
If this pathologist finds anything suspicious, they will stop the PM, confer with HO FP, and Coroner, and police, and procedures step up several levels.
Click to expand...
@dunkley it would be great if you got verified. It’s incredibly helpful and useful on here to know that a poster is speaking from professional experience. Please go for it!
 
AgathapisdT said:
<modsnip >What I would question though, is why a 'psychic' would have a clear view of said tree and the Police and all the other experts did not?
Click to expand...
Possibly because searching had ceased in that area (LE had moved their search right down to the estuary and Morecambe Bay) but also because Nicola is very unlikely to have been in that spot the entire 3 weeks she was missing. Until there is confirmation from both the initial coroner's post mortem and then Home Office pathologist forensic investigation it is as yet still unknown whether or not she had spent all that time in the river or elsewhere
 
Interested_But_Confused said:
Right? PF's company may be technically capable, but PF himself has proven to be a liability. IMO, of course.
Click to expand...
IMO he carried out the exact search of areas in 4 days, as directed by LE...to scan the water, the river bed and to mark any deep areas which required further investigation. It was not his remit to search the vegetation, reeds or bank side and he had specifically stated from the outset his equipment could not see into the reeds. He was desperate to find her, LE didn't want to be upstaged. He was under constant media pressure in a high profile search to provide updates and he categorically did not find any trace of her in the water, on the river bed or in any deep holes. It cannot go unsaid that LE failed also to find her and they were working on it for 3 weeks and it was their remit to search the river banks and reeds. She must have been somewhere. JMO
 
Simplistic67 said:
And the biggest piece of evidence was found by a self described medium...Meanwhile, with all the latest technological equipment, helicopters, sniffer dogs, dinghys etc etc, the Police didnt.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the police don't always find people -- alive or dead -- as promptly as we (and I'm sure they) would like.

Searching water is hard, even when you had evidence and a correct belief that someone is in that water.
 
PF has confirmed in interviews that he passed that very clump of reeds a couple of times as he scanned that exact stretch of water where NB was found, right up to the weir.
Has there been any confirmation from LE yet whether they had at any point searched those reeds where her body was recovered from...as was their task? It is surely now very relevant whether they actually had looked in those reeds and when, how many times they were checked and the last time they did so? This would surely establish the most recent date on which Nicola came to be tangled up there and how long she might have been in that spot? I'm not sure if I have missed LE's announcement on that, if there has in fact been one
 
Cluella DeVille said:
PF has confirmed in interviews that he passed that very clump of reeds a couple of times as he scanned that exact stretch of water where NB was found, right up to the weir.
Has there been any confirmation from LE yet whether they had at any point searched those reeds where her body was recovered from...as was their task? It is surely now very relevant whether they actually had looked in those reeds and when, how many times they were checked and the last time they did so? This would surely establish the most recent date on which Nicola came to be tangled up there and how long she might have been in that spot? I'm not sure if I have missed LE's announcement on that, if there has in fact been one
Click to expand...
They could have searched as many times as they wanted to but a body placed in the reeds could happen at any time after NB disappeared.
Whilst it should all come out of the coroners report, it would be a huge embarrassment for police to have to admit that NB was abducted and murdered.
 
dunkley said:
"In a statement to MailOnline today he said SGI's operational ability and expertise are not in question."

But *something* is .....
I wonder if it could be related to their CEO's apparent inability for discretion, and directly proportionate ability to offer up unsubstantiated theories to the media ...?

JMO
Click to expand...
I'll eat my hat if it isn't because of his conduct. I wouldn't even like to estimate the amount by which he's multiplied the inherent pressure and difficulty of the police operation; it has been beyond belief
 
Woodburnbay said:
They could have searched as many times as they wanted to but a body placed in the reeds could happen at any time after NB disappeared.
Whilst it should all come out of the coroners report, it would be a huge embarrassment for police to have to admit that NB was abducted and murdered.
Click to expand...
But is it not also possible that the body was washed backwards and forwards eventually getting caught in the reeds?
Or that it was there all the time but missed in searches.
 
Woodburnbay said:
They could have searched as many times as they wanted to but a body placed in the reeds could happen at any time after NB disappeared.
Whilst it should all come out of the coroners report, it would be a huge embarrassment for police to have to admit that NB was abducted and murdered.
Click to expand...
Well exactly, but as their working hypothesis was highly focused on her entering the river, in order to substantiate any credibility to support that they would surely have relied on expert advice as to how far she was likely travel as each day passed. She was clearly not in the water so a high likelihood then she may be tangled in bank side vegetation along the way? Because that's going to be even more of an embarrassment if she's been in those reeds for a while and they never checked at regular intervals IMO
Should it transpire NB has been elsewhere and put in those reeds, heads will surely roll
 
dunkley said:
"In a statement to MailOnline today he said SGI's operational ability and expertise are not in question."

But *something* is .....
I wonder if it could be related to their CEO's apparent inability for discretion, and directly proportionate ability to offer up unsubstantiated theories to the media ...?

JMO
Click to expand...
I suspect it is down to the fact that PF kept giving a running commentary to the media along with adding fuel to the conspiracy theories.

The guy is good at what he does. Should have done it quietly imo.
 
Cluella DeVille said:
PF has confirmed in interviews that he passed that very clump of reeds a couple of times as he scanned that exact stretch of water where NB was found, right up to the weir.
Has there been any confirmation from LE yet whether they had at any point searched those reeds where her body was recovered from...as was their task? It is surely now very relevant whether they actually had looked in those reeds and when, how many times they were checked and the last time they did so? This would surely establish the most recent date on which Nicola came to be tangled up there and how long she might have been in that spot? I'm not sure if I have missed LE's announcement on that, if there has in fact been one
Click to expand...
All good questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 182 more.
Total: 4,305 (members: 183, guests: 4,122)

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
4,122
Total visitors
4,305
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,488
Messages
17,969,617
Members
228,787
Latest member
Acalvert
Back
Top